This is just a wild speculation, since a fluid base like wheezy (at current stage, testing phase) is not really a good choice. I will keep my fingers crossed over this.

I would argue the point that wheezy is not a good choice. The Debian maintainers are very conservative, and yes it is termed testing, but my experience is that applications are very solid, and if issues occur are corrected very quickly.

This is just a wild speculation, since a fluid base like wheezy (at current stage, testing phase) is not really a good choice. I will keep my fingers crossed over this.

We tried Ubuntu as a base in the past. There are lots of reasons we abandoned Ubuntu like a cat booking it out of a dog show. Given from what we've witnessed publicly in recent months, such as the treatment of Kubuntu and the Unity Desktop, the development situation with Ubuntu derivatives has actually gotten worse. I expect we'll see some of the better known Ubuntu derivatives scampering back to a Debian(pure) base just to get clear of Canonical.

The point was not that debian testing has conservative packages or not. The point was, debian testing does not have security updates, since it is a testing version anyways. And that is a very different update method than debian-stable packages.For desktop, use of testing is ok (but i would not do it).

Mepis is supposed to be a single good distro to work anywhere (be it desktop or server), hence, it using a debian-testing base will not be a good choice.

The point was not that debian testing has conservative packages or not. The point was, debian testing does not have security updates, since it is a testing version anyways. And that is a very different update method than debian-stable packages.For desktop, use of testing is ok (but i would not do it).

Mepis is supposed to be a single good distro to work anywhere (be it desktop or server), hence, it using a debian-testing base will not be a good choice.

Based on the experience of the past few years, I'm trying a modified strategy.

My current plan, subject to change, is to put out a 100% Wheezycompatible version (12.0) prior to Wheezy final, and follow that in6-9 months with a WheezyPlus (13.0) version, after Wheezy final.

This way, the people who want to run alternate desktops, and such, cando so from 12.0 without running afoul of MEPIS package tweaks.

And those who want to be more up to date in the long run, and use KDEonly, will have 13.0. I expect that it will be possible to upgradefrom 12.0 to 13.0, if you stick with KDE. But if you use an alternatedesktop with MEPIS, you simply shouldn't plan on running 13.0.

To emphasize the difference, I may call 12.0 a stable release, and13.0 an experimental release.

If I have the spare time, the alpha could be ready around May 1.

Interesting, huh? What feedback for Warren do you think we should have about this?

The way I read this is that the packages that have made it to "testing" IE Wheezy at this time have had the security flaws that have appeared in their previous releases fixed. Therefore there is not as many security problems present. If something appears after their inclusion in "Testing" these problems will be addressed by security updates through the proper channels.

The Debian people do not want to compromise anyone system in anyway. Remember they are running the same OS as the rest of us and as they test each release it will put their systems at the same risk because sooner or later you have to allow it to access the outside world (it cannot remain in an isolated environment forever) because when the end user gets it he/she is not going to be running inside a sterile environment.

Steve

_________________

I messed with the dragon and now I am ready for the ketchup!The only stupid question is the one you already know the answer.~Krispy Kritter~

Based on the experience of the past few years, I'm trying a modified strategy.

My current plan, subject to change, is to put out a 100% Wheezycompatible version (12.0) prior to Wheezy final, and follow that in6-9 months with a WheezyPlus (13.0) version, after Wheezy final.

This way, the people who want to run alternate desktops, and such, cando so from 12.0 without running afoul of MEPIS package tweaks.

And those who want to be more up to date in the long run, and use KDEonly, will have 13.0. I expect that it will be possible to upgradefrom 12.0 to 13.0, if you stick with KDE. But if you use an alternatedesktop with MEPIS, you simply shouldn't plan on running 13.0.

To emphasize the difference, I may call 12.0 a stable release, and13.0 an experimental release.

If I have the spare time, the alpha could be ready around May 1.

This is consistent with Warren's numbering system, with major X.0 releases denoting changes to the Debian base, and minor X.5 releases denoting KDE/kernel upgrades to major releases. This is the information we've been looking for.

What's interesting is that Warren is contemplating an experimental release. That's uncharacteristically cutting edge for him.

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] | It is currently Sun Aug 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum